Ashok Garg & ANR v. Ut Of Chandigarh & ANR

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-27176 of 2015 .....

Date of decision:19.10.2015 Ashok Garg and another .....Petitioners v.

U.T. Chandigarh and another .....Respondents ....

Present:

Mr. Sanjeev Patiyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ashima Mor, Standing counsel for U.T. Chandigarhrespondent No.1. Mr. Ram Saroop, Advocate for complainant-respondent No.2. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.73 dated 7.3.2012 registered for the offences under Sections 451, 427, 380 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Sector 11, Chandigarh and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.3).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantUsha Rana on the allegations that the accused-petitioners have sent labourers to renovate and to demolish the whole Kothi, whereas Pragti Gupta has only 1/6th share in the said Kothi. Now with intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a

Cr. Misc. No.M-27176 of 2015 [2] compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh has sent his report dated 9.10.2015 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

Learned standing counsel for the U.T., Chandigarh, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the U.T. would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned standing counsel for the U.T., Chandigarh and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2 and have gone through the record. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

Cr. Misc. No.M-27176 of 2015 [3] in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No.73 dated 7.3.2012 registered for the offences under Sections 451, 427, 380 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Sector 11, Chandigarh and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

October 19, 2015.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*